an article on the Fourth World Bulletin by Poka Laenui (Hayden Burgess) on the 100th 
anniversary of colonization in Hawaii and explores the idea of hawaiian and sel

Laenui, Poka

English

ScholarSpace at University of Hawai'i at Manoa

f One Hundred Years of Colonization in Hawaii Poka Laenui ·-·-C 3 . c~ ::c ~ The year 1993, which marks the hundredth anniversary of the dispossession of native Hawai• ians of their land and their sover. eignty, is a year for the solemn contemplation of some compel• ling questions about the true nature of the United States as a nation and a democracy. At the 'lolani Palace, on January 17, 1993, over I 0,000 Hawaiians and members of the Christian Church (the legacy of early Hawaiian missionaries) panicipated in a peaceful commemoration of the events of a century ago. It was a period of mourning and of addressing the history of 100 years of criminal colonization, a time for Chris• tian apology, a period to wipe the tears and to step into the dream time, a necessity for decolonization ever to take place. In 1893, on January 16, U.S. Marines landed in what was then peaceful Hawaii, armed with Gatling guns, Howitzer can-nons, double canridge belts filled with ammunition, carbines and other instru• ments of war. The troops marched along the streets of Honolulu, rifles facing the 'lolani Palace. the seat of Hawaii's sover• eign government. The following day, 18 resident conspirators, mostly Americans by binh, sneaked 10 the back steps of a government building a few yards from where the American troops had purposely lodged the night before. There, Henry Cooper. an American lawyer and resident of Hawaii for less than a year, proclaimed that he and a handful of others were the "provisional government" of Hawaii, their explicit purpose being to annex Hawaii to the United States. American Minister Plenipotentiary John L. Stevens immediately gave official rec• ognition 10 the ·•provisional government" and then joined in its demand that Queen Lilioukalani. the constitutional monarch of the Hawaiian nation. surrender under threat of war with the United States. The Queen eventually capitulated, but not with-out protest. She declared: 14 1, Lilioukalani, by the grace of God and under the Constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom, Queen, do hereby solemnly protest against any and all acts done against myself and the Cons1itu1ional Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom by certain persons claiming to have established a provisional government of and for this kingdom. That I yield to the superior force of the United States of America. whose minister plenipotentiary, his excellency John L. Stevens, has caused United States troops to be landed al Honolulu and declared 1hat he would suppon the provi-sional government. Now to avoid any collision of anned forces and perhaps the loss oflife, I do, underthis protest, and impelled by said force, yield my authority until such time as the Government of the United States shall. upon the facts being pre• sented to it, undo the action of its representative and reinstate me and the authority which I claim as the constitutional sovereign of the Hawaiian Islands. After taking office a few months later, President Cleveland assigned a special minister to Hawaii to investigate the situ-ation. Outraged by what he learned, in December 18, I 893, he addressed both houses of Congress on the matter, stating: By an act of war, committed with the panicipation of a diplomatic representative of the United States and without authority of Congress, the government of a feeble but friendly and confiding people has been overthrown. A substantial wrong has thus been done, which a due regard for our national charac-ter, as well as the rights of the injured people. requires we should endeavor to repair .... ... but for the lawless occupation of Honolulu under false pretexts by the United States forces. and but for Minister Stevens' recognition of the provisional government when the United States forces were its sole suppon and constituted its only military strength. the Queen and her Government would never have yielded to the provisional government. even for a time and for the sole purpose of submitting her case to the enlightened justice of the United States. Cleveland refused to accept Hawaii as a U.S. territory. The provisional govern-ment simply waited Cleveland out. Presi-dent McKinley subsequently took office, signed a "treaty of annexation" with the provisional government, which, while waiting out Cleveland, had changed its name to the Republic of Hawaii. McKinley, knowing quite well that he could not obtain the two--thirds vote in the Senate required by the U.S. Constitution to ratify this treaty, instead forwarded it to the Joint Houses of Congress as a resolu• tion, requiring a mere majority in both houses. The Congress accepted the treaty by joint resolution and Hawaii was thus declared to be a U.S. possession. The Hawaiian nation, previously rec• ognized in the international community as a sovereign state, with treaties and executive agreements around the world (including at least five such treaties with the United States), possessing a literacy rate among the highest in the world ( far in advance of the United States at the time), and made up of a multi - racial, multi-ethnic citizenry, became a colony possessed and controlled by the United States. The resident conspirators of Hawaii were then able to sell Hawaiian sugar in U.S. markets without having to pay for-eign impon tariffs. Sugar became king in Hawaii; everything sugar touched it con-trolled. Banking, utilities. shipping, poli-tics and communications were all under 1he control of1he '•Big Five" corporations with interlocking directorates tied to sugar. The U.S. military took the choicest parts of Hawaii for naval bases and made Hawaii an American Pacific fortress, part of the military strategy of "out-basing." Hawaii• s citizens were automatically made U.S. citizens. prodded to drop their own identities and to accept "Americanism." Schools became recycling institutions for ripping out nafr.,e identities and replacing them with American identities. Students were told to drop their indigenous names Poka Laenui (Hayden Burgess) ,s President of the Pacific Asian Co11nc1l of Indigenous People and also represents 1he lnslllute for the Ad,·ancemem of Hull'aiian :I flairs. Fourth World Bulletin •July 1993 and take up American names. to speak English and not "that foreign language" (Hawaiian), to pledge allegiance to the American flag and sing its national an-them, to profess that if America had not come to protect them, they would have all been speaking a foreign language imposed by a foreign invader(!) . "Hawaiian" was understood to identify a race rather than a nationality. The Euro-peans, North Americans, Orientals and Pacific Islanders who had previously be-come Hawaiian citizens lost their national identity. The United States regulated im-migration and transmigrated U.S. citizens without limit to Hawaii. The United States controlled foreign trade and made Hawaii mto a captive market. Hawaii was run as a military camp. Every aspect of Hawaii was Americanized. Military show of strength was constant Trade was totally controlled. Education and media were regu-lated. Hawaii, a melting pot of cultures, races, languages and lore changed from a reality to an advertising slogan for politi-cians and merchants. Finally. in 1959, afterthree generations of colonial rule, Hawaiians were given the chance to become "equal Americans." The United States placed the following ques-tion to the "qualified voters" of Hawaii (Americans who were residents of Hawaii for at least one year): "Shall Hawaii im-mediately be admined into the Union as a state?" (The Admission Act of March 18, 1959, PL 86-3, 73 Stat 4). They voted overwhelmingly to make Hawaii a state. During the 1960s and beyond, native Hawaiians witnessed the emergence of pride in cultural identity among blacks, Chicanos and American Indians of the U.S. mainland. They witnessed the falli-bility of the great American nation in the Vietnam War. They witnessed the libera-tion of independent states in the Pacific, starting with Western Samoa. in 1962, followed by others like Fiji, Nauru. Tuvalu, Kiribati, Papua New Guinea, Cook Is-lands, Niue and Vanuatu. the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia. Most of these inde-pendent decolonized states gained seats in the United Nations. So the questions emerge: Wh11 about Hawaii? Are Hawaiins entitled to 1.;1f-de-tennination? Was that right .. consumed" in 1959, such that a referendum cannot now be placed legitimately before the Ha-Fourth World Bulletin • July 1993 waiian people? If the inalienability of self-detenninarion requires that there can be no such "consumption" or if the plebi-scite in 1959 constituted a fraud such that there was no true exercise of self-detenni-nation. how would self-detennination be practiced today, following one hundred years of U.S. colonial rule? Who would constitute the "self' to ex-ercise detennination? Would it be by ra-cial definition. in which only the descendants of the native Hawaiians would qualify? Would it be all descendants of the citizens of the Hawaiian nation, irrespec-rive of race? Would it consist of a wider category of "eligible" citizens, of people who are willing to avow singular loyalty to Hawaii as a nation and disclaim alle-giance to any other nation? Would the ·•self' include any citizen of the United States who had lived in Hawaii for at least one year? Once the "self' is identified, what choices should be available for Hawaii under the concept of se\f-dctcnnination? Under a widely accepted view of U.S. law and history, Hawaii would not be permit-ted to "secede" from the United States. Therefore. the question would be to what extent should Hawaii's native people be given special regard for some sense of "autonomy," to be called a "tribe,'' a "na-tion within a nation," or a "federally rec-ognized entity," etc.' Another view, however, extends the range of relevant options far beyond the limits of U.S. law. Under that view, rhe Unired States is not exempt from inrerna-tional law. The United Nations has spoken clearly that -the choices lo be given a non-self-governing territory should range from integration within the metropolitan country, free association with that coUJ1. try, or emergence as an independent state. The concept of Hawaiian independence is supported by principles of international law. The right to independence is under-lined by the recent liberation of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. which initiated the breakup of the Soviet Union. Under an independent Hawaiian state, native Ha• waiians could have rights as indigenous people fully respected, while the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all people, irrespective of their racial. ethnic or national origins would be given proper recognition. Hawaii will therefore be an interesting place to watch in 1993. This year calls special attention to the circumstances of indigenous peoples around the world. due to the United Nations proclamation as the International Year of the World's Indig-enous Peoples. It juxtaposes the continu-ing international call for decolonization in the world with the internationally devel-oping right of indigenous peoples to the integrity of their government, culture, lan-guage and territorial jurisdiction. How will these fundamental issues be resolved? Will Hawaii's independence advocates resort to anns or will they con-tinue to abide by the peaceful path laid out by Queen Lilioukalani in 1893? Will Chris-tian Americans heed the queen's call for justice made so eloquently at the begin-nrng of this I 00-year chapter of Hawaiian c ,mization? "Indigenous Peoples' Politics 101" The Fourth World Center is developing a new introductory curriculum for use by undergraduate teachers of Fourth World Studies (Indigenous Peoples' Politics). Formaned for use in a sixteen-week semester, the study and discussion guide consists of a reader of case studies following a thematic progression, accompanied by an activities book of classroom exercises designed for a dynamic teaching and learning process. Themes include: state- nation interaction. treaties, genocide and ethnocide, social-ist treatment of the national question, ethnonationalism and secession ism. develop-ment and modernization, and comparative institutions of autonomy. Case studies include: Canada, Guatemala, Chile, Brazil, E1hiop1a, Kurdistan, India, Indonesia, Tatar.;tan, Croatia, and Uganda. To order the teaching materials and for general informa1ion on the curriculum development project. please mail the coupon on page 19 of this issue or contact the Fourth World Center. 15 1 

One Hundred Years of Colonization in Hawaii

http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/77668/1/DOC670.pdf

One Hundred Years of Colonization in Hawaii

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ScholarSpace at University of Hawai'i at Manoa